This is a good insight into what has been going on behind the scenes: 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...geant-out.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...geant-out.html
What really drove John Sergeant out
1 of 4
I see the Mail is up to the usual tabloid trick of anonymous "sources".
So no reason to believe any of it.
So no reason to believe any of it.
I don't think a word of what that stupid paper says is credible. Some of the SCD stories they've been running this year have been awful, including the "Rachel's own dad thinks she dull and nothing more than a pretty face!!! Haha! How funny! Lets make a joke!"
This will all be old news by Monday, hopefully.
This will all be old news by Monday, hopefully.
I don't like the Mail one bit but have been told that he was made to feel extremely uncomfortable - but not by everyone, there were some notable exceptions. The article is an exaggeration of how it was but not totally untrue.
Those who put the pressure on him are now sorry of course, a lot of it was not intentional.
This year's series is far more competitive than previous series. I have no idea why. Obviously people want to do their best and win if they can but it is not Come Dancing. Some lost sight of that and it has now backfired on them.
Anyway it is over now. I think John Sergeant wants to put it behind him and not have the public dwell on it any more. John himself has said he left of his own accord and has denied any bullying. He has left knowing he had a huge percentage of votes - which was what made him fear he might win (which I don't think would have happened - but might have), or reach the final (which was indeed a strong possibility), and obviously being kept in week after week would have intensified the atmosphere.
Those who put the pressure on him are now sorry of course, a lot of it was not intentional.
This year's series is far more competitive than previous series. I have no idea why. Obviously people want to do their best and win if they can but it is not Come Dancing. Some lost sight of that and it has now backfired on them.
Anyway it is over now. I think John Sergeant wants to put it behind him and not have the public dwell on it any more. John himself has said he left of his own accord and has denied any bullying. He has left knowing he had a huge percentage of votes - which was what made him fear he might win (which I don't think would have happened - but might have), or reach the final (which was indeed a strong possibility), and obviously being kept in week after week would have intensified the atmosphere.
And of course his leaving had absolutely nothing to do with the fact he is contracted to do a lecture tour on the Oceana for two weeks in the Caribbean starting next week
No it didn't and he was not firmly contracted. His agent had it lined up as a possibility. I am not biased, if I genuinely believed that he left, amidst all this publicity and bad feeling, just to do a lecture cruise, I would consider that to be very bad, but it was not like that at all. There have been other threads about the cruise business, explaining it all. We will just go round in circles if we keep repeating it.
Well I'm going to keep repeating it because I believe it's true. Everyone else has their opinion and this is mine.
Fair enough, you are entitled to your opinion of course. The only thing I would add is that it would not be a bad idea to find out a bit more instead of just latching onto something like that, and think about it from all angles.
Best wishes though.
Best wishes though
.
Originally Posted by Force Ten:
“And of course his leaving had absolutely nothing to do with the fact he is contracted to do a lecture tour on the Oceana for two weeks in the Caribbean starting next week”
“And of course his leaving had absolutely nothing to do with the fact he is contracted to do a lecture tour on the Oceana for two weeks in the Caribbean starting next week
”
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukp...N1XXod_3Yh0-iQ
And a statement from P&O Cruises emphasised the engagement was a "long standing arrangement" and should he have remained in the contest "we would have been delighted for him to bring Kristina on board to practise during the cruise and we would have been flexible around his television commitments.
"Alternatively we could have rescheduled his appearance to a different cruise."
The statement continued: "John's decision to leave Strictly Come Dancing was in no way was influenced by his contracted work on Oceana
I really don't believe that the two are linked.
I'm no fan of that paper but i don't think its that hard to believe tbh
No, not hard at all. The thing is, things like cruises, albeit working cruises, sound so exotic and glamourous to some people (& I am sure they are lovely if you like that sort of thing), but for someone like John they are things that come up every now and then and he can pick and choose. Anyway I hope he manages to relax a bit while he is away, this last week cannot have been easy for him nor for his family (it's been bad enough for us 
.
.
I thought one part in that article - if true of, course - suddenly made perfect sense of why John didn't comfort the crying Kristina in front of millions of people on ITT...
Did anyone leave a comment on that pack of lies?
Heres what I submitted:
What a load of hogwash you write (included writers name). There I've named you, more then the load of lies you have the cheek of writing. Anonymous insiders and sources are just figments of your imagination. I suggest you listen to the ACTUAL source John Sergeant and print his reasons for leaving.
Heres what I submitted:
What a load of hogwash you write (included writers name). There I've named you, more then the load of lies you have the cheek of writing. Anonymous insiders and sources are just figments of your imagination. I suggest you listen to the ACTUAL source John Sergeant and print his reasons for leaving.
I have to say at lot of this article rang true as very little of what was said surprised me. I don't think there is anything that new in it. It also ties in with a few of the hints John dropped on Weds night on ITT and in the press conference.
What does annoying me though is people consistently maintaining that John left because of this flaming cruise. Force Ten - I hope you take the time to read the statement from P&O.
They made it crystal clear they were happy to reschedule.
What does annoying me though is people consistently maintaining that John left because of this flaming cruise. Force Ten - I hope you take the time to read the statement from P&O.
They made it crystal clear they were happy to reschedule.
Lazy journalist alert:
'Indeed, Sergeant hinted at the naked animosity on the set when he said on Strictly's BBC spin-off, Just The Two Of Us, this week'
I think it would be naive to think there aren't tensions and rivalries backstage. At the end of the day, the celebs are under a lot of pressure, and the pros are used to being competitive (and in some cases have competed professional against one another), and any large workplace has its share of office politics.
I still think this is a pretty sleazy article. The whole thing is according to 'insiders' and 'sources'- very hard to prove or disprove. All the BBC can do to defend themselves is issue a statement, which will be seen as damage control whether or not it is true.
I haven't seen many indications that the pros believe they're the stars of the show (although personally for me they are in any case, but that's a minority view!), in fact this series they have been uncharacteristically in the background, even strong personalities like Brendan.
I don't see any indication of the judges having pushed for John to leave, although obviously we have no idea what was happening backstage. But even on Monday, Claudia asked the judges if they thought he should step down and they gave a firm 'no'. They didn't have to do that, they could have given a neutral answer if they wanted to.
'Cole, the show's highest profile dancer, is said to have remained unhappy and has been pushing for a pay rise to put him on terms with the four experts who each earn about £90,000.'
-I doubt anyone is so delusional as to think they are going to get a £67,000 pay rise. I don't think the pay situation is fair, but the pros know the score.
''It might seem to the viewers like one big happy family, but behind the scenes you'd be amazed at all the backstabbing.' '
-I wouldn't be amazed at all. It would seem like a typical workplace! I think it's the BBC who want it portrayed like that, and rightly so as it's a family show.
'Indeed, Sergeant hinted at the naked animosity on the set when he said on Strictly's BBC spin-off, Just The Two Of Us, this week'
I think it would be naive to think there aren't tensions and rivalries backstage. At the end of the day, the celebs are under a lot of pressure, and the pros are used to being competitive (and in some cases have competed professional against one another), and any large workplace has its share of office politics.
I still think this is a pretty sleazy article. The whole thing is according to 'insiders' and 'sources'- very hard to prove or disprove. All the BBC can do to defend themselves is issue a statement, which will be seen as damage control whether or not it is true.
I haven't seen many indications that the pros believe they're the stars of the show (although personally for me they are in any case, but that's a minority view!), in fact this series they have been uncharacteristically in the background, even strong personalities like Brendan.
I don't see any indication of the judges having pushed for John to leave, although obviously we have no idea what was happening backstage. But even on Monday, Claudia asked the judges if they thought he should step down and they gave a firm 'no'. They didn't have to do that, they could have given a neutral answer if they wanted to.
'Cole, the show's highest profile dancer, is said to have remained unhappy and has been pushing for a pay rise to put him on terms with the four experts who each earn about £90,000.'
-I doubt anyone is so delusional as to think they are going to get a £67,000 pay rise
. I don't think the pay situation is fair, but the pros know the score. ''It might seem to the viewers like one big happy family, but behind the scenes you'd be amazed at all the backstabbing.' '
-I wouldn't be amazed at all. It would seem like a typical workplace! I think it's the BBC who want it portrayed like that, and rightly so as it's a family show.
Originally Posted by katie_p:
“
'Cole, the show's highest profile dancer, is said to have remained unhappy and has been pushing for a pay rise to put him on terms with the four experts who each earn about £90,000.'
-I doubt anyone is so delusional as to think they are going to get a £67,000 pay rise. I don't think the pay situation is fair, but the pros know the score.
.”
“
'Cole, the show's highest profile dancer, is said to have remained unhappy and has been pushing for a pay rise to put him on terms with the four experts who each earn about £90,000.'
-I doubt anyone is so delusional as to think they are going to get a £67,000 pay rise
. I don't think the pay situation is fair, but the pros know the score. .”
On this point the article is correct - it has been reported that the judges earn £90,000.
Some of this is re-hashing of previous 'stories'. There's probably a grain of truth there but it's exaggerated. I can't believe that a tough politician journalist couldn't take a few verbal knocks - I can believe that they soured the experience but not that he was crushed by it.
I think it's do with his family at least partially - he seemed quite irritate and upset that people had been harassing his mrs on ITT.
I think it's do with his family at least partially - he seemed quite irritate and upset that people had been harassing his mrs on ITT.
It's a sad article in a sad paper.
It's obvious there are rivalries back stage, you saw a lot of venom last week pre John quitting and pre the hilarious backtracking that has been going on. But who cares unless it crosses the line?
The ones seen as “nasty” i.e. James will never win the competition, because for example in his case there is always something to moan about with all he has danced with....so justice will out.
If the BBC are that bothered they would start axing people but they won't.....If Brendan is such a pain they could have got rid of him when he was on that awful Love Island but they didnt.
....and hang on a source has just told (even though I have just talked to nobody) me that it will be back next year with Anton as host and Claudia as blonde thing and all the same judges and all the same pro’s and James with Gaby because although it was brilliant the night she left it was mean, so Gaby and James will dance every year until you people vote for her!(Next year you will have one number to call for voting decided by the judges)....or did I just make it up
It's obvious there are rivalries back stage, you saw a lot of venom last week pre John quitting and pre the hilarious backtracking that has been going on. But who cares unless it crosses the line?
The ones seen as “nasty” i.e. James will never win the competition, because for example in his case there is always something to moan about with all he has danced with....so justice will out.
If the BBC are that bothered they would start axing people but they won't.....If Brendan is such a pain they could have got rid of him when he was on that awful Love Island but they didnt.
....and hang on a source has just told (even though I have just talked to nobody) me that it will be back next year with Anton as host and Claudia as blonde thing and all the same judges and all the same pro’s and James with Gaby because although it was brilliant the night she left it was mean, so Gaby and James will dance every year until you people vote for her!(Next year you will have one number to call for voting decided by the judges)....or did I just make it up
Originally Posted by gritty:
“On this point the article is correct - it has been reported that the judges earn £90,000.”
“On this point the article is correct - it has been reported that the judges earn £90,000.”
I meant Brendan supposedly thinking the BBC were suddenly going to start paying him as much as the judges!
Also the paper refers to the judges as experts
Experts in what exactly? Only one of them is actually qualified to judge ballroom and latin!
Originally Posted by katmobile:
“Some of this is re-hashing of previous 'stories'. There's probably a grain of truth there but it's exaggerated. I can't believe that a tough politician journalist couldn't take a few verbal knocks - I can believe that they soured the experience but not that he was crushed by it.
I think it's do with his family at least partially - he seemed quite irritate and upset that people had been harassing his mrs on ITT.”
“Some of this is re-hashing of previous 'stories'. There's probably a grain of truth there but it's exaggerated. I can't believe that a tough politician journalist couldn't take a few verbal knocks - I can believe that they soured the experience but not that he was crushed by it.
I think it's do with his family at least partially - he seemed quite irritate and upset that people had been harassing his mrs on ITT.”
I just don't think John would care that much, he is a wealthy man and not fame hungary and desperate.
It's the Daily Mail being the Daily Mail. I'm sure that there are tensions backstage and that egos get bruised, but all the unnamed sources by BBC insiders make me question the validity of this article.
Originally Posted by CybesVybes:
“I thought one part in that article - if true of, course - suddenly made perfect sense of why John didn't comfort the crying Kristina in front of millions of people on ITT...”
“I thought one part in that article - if true of, course - suddenly made perfect sense of why John didn't comfort the crying Kristina in front of millions of people on ITT...”
Yes I thought that too poor guy.
1 of 4
